Time Warner Cable cancels usage caps

[AnonymouseUser]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: AnonymouseUser
Lot's O'stuff

Good job :^)

You told them why you were switching, right?

I did tell Earthlink, but didn't really have a chance to tell TWC. When I called TWC I had the option of answering a survey about their service, which I chose to do. Someone was supposed to call me back after the call ended, but so far they haven't.

 

[Parasitic]

From what it seems, this is only in trial markets, right? So existing TWC customers aren't getting reamed in the ass until trial testing is over?

 

[Legend]

TWC reminds me of the Bush admin in both incompetence and in the bullshit that they spout. They are charging this because their outdated coaxial network is congested, and they want more revenue from streaming services. If they had used some of the money from their outrageous bills for fiber infrastructure, this wouldn't have been necessary.

I'm going to switch as soon as I can find better options in Austin TX. Even if they revert these caps. I simply do not do business with companies like these.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Legend
TWC reminds me of the Bush admin in both incompetence and in the bullshit that they spout. They are charging this because their outdated coaxial network is congested, and they want more revenue from streaming services. If they had used some of the money from their outrageous bills for fiber infrastructure, this wouldn't have been necessary.

I'm going to switch as soon as I can find better options in Austin TX. Even if they revert these caps. I simply do not do business with companies like these.

I find it extremely hard to believe they aren't HFC (you can guess what the F stands for), especially since they are rolling out docsis 3.0. Good news though, AT&T Uverse is in your area and caps will be implemented with that service as well.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: SSSnail
I understand the ISP wants to rape everybody with their bandwidth caps, and understand they want to make money while not upgrading shits, foregoing innovations, etc... What I don't understand though, why is spidey slobbering on their knobs? It's not like he gets something out of it?

What really gets me is that he seems to love TWC the most of all of them, even though they offer by far the worst deal of them all. I don't know, maybe he gets off on the thought of cash-strapped proletariats sending their hard-earned money to large corporations so he can berate them for being poor and for being cheap, simultaneously.

IF you have not noticed all the telecoms are always upgrading their equipment.

 

[marvdmartian]

I wouldn't mind some sort of reasonable limit, IF time warner here had any sort of stability. Too often, almost always on the weekend (when it's impossible to get anyone out to check it out), I've had a loss of service, or degraded service. Funny, they charge me the same price for those days, unless I call and pitch a fit, and maybe get lucky enough to be credited a day or two.

Here's an idea, TWC........increase your reliability BEFORE you increase your rates!! :roll:


Who wants to bet there'll be a class action lawsuit against them in the forseeable future?? :evil:

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: AnonymouseUser
-snip-

So now I am with Earthlink for $29.95/month for the first six months, $41.95/month thereafter, with no caps, using the exact same hardware and cables as I was using with RoadRunner, which they are charging $44.95/month for. There was no threat of caps in my area yet, but it would only be a matter of time if TWC doesn't get the message that their customers don't want ridiculous caps on their service. I am voting with my wallet.

Good to hear. :thumbsup:

My only worry would be that if a lot of customers start switching, TWC will try to force EarthLink to start doing caps as well (they own the lines, after all, so I'm sure they can basically dictate conditions to EarthLink). But until then, enjoy.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: AnonymouseUser
-snip-

So now I am with Earthlink for $29.95/month for the first six months, $41.95/month thereafter, with no caps, using the exact same hardware and cables as I was using with RoadRunner, which they are charging $44.95/month for. There was no threat of caps in my area yet, but it would only be a matter of time if TWC doesn't get the message that their customers don't want ridiculous caps on their service. I am voting with my wallet.

Good to hear. :thumbsup:

My only worry would be that if a lot of customers start switching, TWC will try to force EarthLink to start doing caps as well (they own the lines, after all, so I'm sure they can basically dictate conditions to EarthLink). But until then, enjoy.

All we can hope for is that TWC gets a big enough backlash against these caps that it never comes to that. Of course, the only way that will happen is if enough people actually do something.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Legend
TWC reminds me of the Bush admin in both incompetence and in the bullshit that they spout. They are charging this because their outdated coaxial network is congested, and they want more revenue from streaming services. If they had used some of the money from their outrageous bills for fiber infrastructure, this wouldn't have been necessary.

I'm going to switch as soon as I can find better options in Austin TX. Even if they revert these caps. I simply do not do business with companies like these.

Well in a way you're right. Bush knew how to get what he wanted(protecting us from Terrorism) and used any means possible to achieve it. TWC just wants to make money, you can't blame them. We just need to find a way to wrestle TWC's monopoly status away from it and market forces will do the rest!

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Legend
TWC reminds me of the Bush admin in both incompetence and in the bullshit that they spout. They are charging this because their outdated coaxial network is congested, and they want more revenue from streaming services. If they had used some of the money from their outrageous bills for fiber infrastructure, this wouldn't have been necessary.

I'm going to switch as soon as I can find better options in Austin TX. Even if they revert these caps. I simply do not do business with companies like these.

Well in a way you're right. Bush knew how to get what he wanted(protecting us from Terrorism) and used any means possible to achieve it. TWC just wants to make money, you can't blame them. We just need to find a way to wrestle TWC's monopoly status away from it and market forces will do the rest!

Cable monopoly days are done. MOst state franchise laws have been redone at this point.

 

[Special K]

Originally posted by: Legend
TWC reminds me of the Bush admin in both incompetence and in the bullshit that they spout. They are charging this because their outdated coaxial network is congested, and they want more revenue from streaming services. If they had used some of the money from their outrageous bills for fiber infrastructure, this wouldn't have been necessary.

I'm going to switch as soon as I can find better options in Austin TX. Even if they revert these caps. I simply do not do business with companies like these.

I'm also in Austin and am wondering - what options do we have besides TWC and AT&T?

 

[Special K]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: SSSnail
I understand the ISP wants to rape everybody with their bandwidth caps, and understand they want to make money while not upgrading shits, foregoing innovations, etc... What I don't understand though, why is spidey slobbering on their knobs? It's not like he gets something out of it?

I try to educate you guys on how all this stuff works and how expensive it is and dispel all the misinformation that just about every post in this thread is by people that have no idea what they are talking about.

Regarding the common and complete lie that they are not upgrading their infrastructure even TWC is moving to DOCSIS 3.0 and that requires quite a bit of upgrading.

Then why does Comcast offer a very generous cap of 250 GB, whereas TWC offers a measly 40 GB?

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: Special K

Originally posted by: Legend
TWC reminds me of the Bush admin in both incompetence and in the bullshit that they spout. They are charging this because their outdated coaxial network is congested, and they want more revenue from streaming services. If they had used some of the money from their outrageous bills for fiber infrastructure, this wouldn't have been necessary.

I'm going to switch as soon as I can find better options in Austin TX. Even if they revert these caps. I simply do not do business with companies like these.

I'm also in Austin and am wondering - what options do we have besides TWC and AT&T?

As mentioned earlier, check into EarthLink. It's the same network as Time Warner, so you shouldn't even need to switch modems. Just call them up and you should be able to do the switch over the phone.

 

[Wyndru]

Before people all start switching to earthlink, be careful. Some reps over there have been reported as saying that when TWC puts the caps in, they will be enforcing the same rules, so you may want to get it in writing before agreeing to anything. They wouldn't give any info to me in writing so I would not switch, plus the rep didn't know too much about the cap thing to begin with. Below is the info from www.stopthecap.com (not sure how legit it is, but I'll see if I can find the other link from the earthlink side)

[Update 4/7: Although Earthlink corporate officials have been silent on the question, Alex Dudley (Time Warner) claims that Earthlink will also be capped give us pause, and pending direct confirmation from Earthlink, I have struck the line about no caps from the article. Earthlink customer service representatives are still claiming no usage caps will be imposed as of this morning, but they are only reading from a script they were previously trained with. Earthlink's corporate communications office, if they ever return our calls, will be a more definitive source on this question.]

So be sure you get a contract that states no caps before jumping ship...

 

[Bignate603]

I would have no problem paying per GB if it was a REASONABLE charge. $1/GB is ridiculous. Reasonable would be something like $.10/GB or less. A $20 connection fee and $.10/GB wouldn't be so bad.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Special K

Then why does Comcast offer a very generous cap of 250 GB, whereas TWC offers a measly 40 GB?

Economies of scale, operational costs, depreciation of existing gear. It's all accounting. Capital expense and operational expense, the models are nothing new, one is doing it better than the other.

 

[SampSon]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Special K

Then why does Comcast offer a very generous cap of 250 GB, whereas TWC offers a measly 40 GB?

Economies of scale, operational costs, depreciation of existing gear. It's all accounting. Capital expense and operational expense, the models are nothing new, one is doing it better than the other.

Those two can't be considered competitors if put in the same geographical market and both are charging comparable rates. The consumer doesn't care about the economics of a companies operation if it isn't delivering the same product at a competitive rate.

 

[aldamon]

Originally posted by: fuct
Before people all start switching to earthlink, be careful. Some reps over there have been reported as saying that when TWC puts the caps in, they will be enforcing the same rules, so you may want to get it in writing before agreeing to anything. They wouldn't give any info to me in writing so I would not switch, plus the rep didn't know too much about the cap thing to begin with. Below is the info from www.stopthecap.com (not sure how legit it is, but I'll see if I can find the other link from the earthlink side)

This has been said multiple times, but here goes again: Since I'm a DirecTV subscriber, I was getting screwed with RR @ $49.99. EL is $29.99 for six months and then $41.99 after that. Even if EL implements caps, a savings of $8 a month after the promo period buys me another 8GB of cap space. I completed my switch tonight. Painless after I got a competent tech on the second try.

 

[Ilmater]

I'll just say this: I work at a wireless phone company, and we (like everyone else) have a 5GB cap on our connection card plans that used to be unlimited. I'm sure all the carriers did it for the same reason we did... we simply were losing money on the small portion of customers that use that much. I'm also sure that Time Warner and others are facing the same capacity issues. I use a TON of bandwidth at home like the rest of you, but think about it:

If you use more gas, it costs more, right?
If you eat more food, it costs more, right?
If you use more electricity, it costs more, right?

I know it sucks, and I wish this wasn't happening, but the fact is, it was pretty much inevitable.

 

[lifeobry]

$99 for 60GB/mo

$150 for INFINITY/mo

wat.

 

[mchammer187]

Originally posted by: Ilmater
I'll just say this: I work at a wireless phone company, and we (like everyone else) have a 5GB cap on our connection card plans that used to be unlimited. I'm sure all the carriers did it for the same reason we did... we simply were losing money on the small portion of customers that use that much. I'm also sure that Time Warner and others are facing the same capacity issues. I use a TON of bandwidth at home like the rest of you, but think about it:

If you use more gas, it costs more, right?
If you eat more food, it costs more, right?
If you use more electricity, it costs more, right?

I know it sucks, and I wish this wasn't happening, but the fact is, it was pretty much inevitable.

no one cares about caps

its a 40 GB cap for $60 a month where you get a 250 GB cap from comcast for the same price

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Special K

Then why does Comcast offer a very generous cap of 250 GB, whereas TWC offers a measly 40 GB?

Economies of scale, operational costs, depreciation of existing gear. It's all accounting. Capital expense and operational expense, the models are nothing new, one is doing it better than the other.

More like "seeing how much they can dick the consumer in a competition-free environment."

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: Ilmater
I'll just say this: I work at a wireless phone company, and we (like everyone else) have a 5GB cap on our connection card plans that used to be unlimited. I'm sure all the carriers did it for the same reason we did... we simply were losing money on the small portion of customers that use that much. I'm also sure that Time Warner and others are facing the same capacity issues. I use a TON of bandwidth at home like the rest of you, but think about it:

If you use more gas, it costs more, right?
If you eat more food, it costs more, right?
If you use more electricity, it costs more, right?

I know it sucks, and I wish this wasn't happening, but the fact is, it was pretty much inevitable.

I think the main problem with cellular data connections is tower congestion. Up until recently I don't think it was uncommon for a cell tower to only be served by one or two T1 lines. Obviously if you're guaranteeing users 400-700kbps with EVDO, you can't get a lot of users on a tower before you saturate its connection. But now that cellular data demands are increasing I think companies have done a lot to upgrade backhaul and increase tower capacity.

That said, I use Alltel Axcess for my main connection, and usage varies, but I probably go through about 20GB/mo on average. The service has always been pretty good and they've never said anything about my usage. Verizon bought Alltel and will basically be using the same towers and infrastructure, the same ones that seem to work fine with my usage. However they'll probably start capping Alltel customers who previously enjoyed unlimited usage at 5GB/mo. Considering I've been using unlimited Alltel EVDO for over two years with no major problems, it's really hard for me to believe that these caps are necessary. Maybe in larger cities where data towers are more congested, but in the rural areas that Alltel serves it just doesn't seem like it's necessary.

Of course Verizon can get away with it because many EVDO customers probably use it for mobile business and stuff. But for those of us in rural areas who use it as a primary connection, 5GB/mo just doesn't cut it IMO.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Special K

Then why does Comcast offer a very generous cap of 250 GB, whereas TWC offers a measly 40 GB?

Economies of scale, operational costs, depreciation of existing gear. It's all accounting. Capital expense and operational expense, the models are nothing new, one is doing it better than the other.

More like "seeing how much they can dick the consumer in a competition-free environment."

What the hell are you talking about? Pick up the phone and there are probably a half dozen companies that will GLADLY provide you internet service.

 

[ManBearPig]

how can you actually monitor how much you use?